Introduction Organized Criminal Terrorism

Abstract

Over the years, global institutions such as the United Nations and regional organizations like the Council of Europe (CoE) and the Organization of American States (OAS), along with scholars, have consistently alerted their member states to the emergence of a new relationship or ‘nexus’ between jihadist terrorism and transnational organized crime. This heightened awareness underscores the escalated threat to national and international peace and security posed by the collaboration of these two illegal and violent forces. Unlike other international institutions, such as the EU Parliament, the UN Security Council has played an exemplary role in raising the alarm, addressing the links between international terrorism and transnational organized crime through a series of resolutions (2482/2019, 2462/2019, 2347/2017, 2396/2017, 2178/2014). In these resolutions, the Security Council not only acknowledged the existence of this nexus but also urged states to implement appropriate measures to suppress these threats. A crucial moment in recognizing the direct link between terrorism and its funding through transnational organized crime occurred with the UN Security Council’s adoption of Resolution 2195 in 2014. This resolution highlighted the challenges posed by terrorists benefiting from organized crime, with a specific focus on regions like Africa, where terrorism has exacted a devastating toll. The thematic debate on ‘terrorism and cross-border crime,’ led by Chad as the president of the UN Security Council, underscored the urgency of addressing the dangerous and growing linkage between terrorism and cross-border crime. Moreover, resolution 2195 marked a departure from 15 years of UN Security Council inactivity on the general question of the links between terrorism and organized crime as threats to international security. By recognizing a broad range of criminal activities, including the trafficking of arms, persons, drugs, and illicit trade in natural resources, the resolution expanded the understanding of the links between terrorism and organized crime. Importantly, corruption was identified as a facilitating mechanism for terrorism, organized crime, and the links between them. Since the adoption of Resolution 2195, the link between terrorism and organized crime has become a regular thematic topic in the UN Security Council’s debates. Bold assertions have been made about terrorists benefiting from organized crime, both domestically and transnationally, as a significant source of funding and logistical support. This shift in policy-making reflects a growing acknowledgment of the evolving nature of threats to international peace and security. The resolution not only emphasized the linkages between terrorism and organized crime but also called for a better understanding of these links through further research, empirical data collection, and the production of new evidence. This imperative resonates with the broader need highlighted in the volume of essays discussed earlier – the need for a more informed discussion based on empirical evidence to formulate appropriate policy and legal responses to the complex nexus between terrorism and organized crime. In the aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist attacks to the US soil, scholars, policy experts, and security officials have increasingly focused on investigating the crime-terror nexus. The expanding body of literature, albeit curiously paying less attention to the connections between terrorism and organized crime in Africa or the applicability and effectiveness of AU legal instruments in countering the phenomenon, portrays the convergence of these two domains as a prevalent characteristic of the contemporary security landscape. This depiction implies that such convergence heightens the terrorism threat by strengthening the financial foundations of terrorist organizations. The crime-terror nexus concept introduces a widely accepted connection, distinguishing tactical and organizational relationships among these entities. This, along with poor border security, weak law enforcement, corrupt public officials, and established smuggling networks, has facilitated the potential emergence of hybrid forms of violent actors resulting from the convergence of their motives and activities. Recent perspectives deviate from emphasizing formalized collaboration between criminal and terrorist actors, instead highlighting the existence of “overlapping ecosystems” or similar social environments from which both criminals and terrorists recruit their members. The initial conceptualizations of the crime-terror nexus focused on the growing similarity in tactics employed by both criminal and terrorist groups. Examples include the involvement of drug trafficking organizations in acts of terrorism or the efforts of terrorist groups to participate in activities such as the drug trade, kidnapping, arms trafficking, and human trafficking. Derived from its conceptual forerunner, “narco-terrorism,” this approach concentrates on documenting the tactics adopted by criminal or terrorist actors and assessing the extent to which the borrowed tactics have aided a group in achieving its goals. A surge in research has occurred, documenting the utilization of criminal activities by terrorist and insurgent groups. These activities encompass drug trafficking, human trafficking, oil smuggling, diamond smuggling, trafficking in cultural artifacts and wildlife, extortion rackets, and engagement in cybercrime. An alternative organizational viewpoint redirects attention from tactics to the methods of collaboration between terrorist and criminal groups. It examines how these organizational linkages contribute to the advancement of the groups’ goals. Research on the crime-terror nexus has recorded instances in which criminal and terrorist groups leverage each other’s expertise, skills, networks, and institutional structures for mutual advantage. For instance, there is evidence of the Colombia’s Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) and the Tamil Tigers of Sri Lanka providing security support to criminal cartels engaged in drug production and trafficking, all in exchange for monetary compensation. In the 1990s, the leftist National Liberation Army (ELN) allowed itself to be hired by Colombian cartels to carry out several car bombings. Hezbollah, a Shiite Muslim group with political and militant facets, has established sophisticated smuggling schemes that involve collaboration with criminal actors. These endeavors are aimed at facilitating its extensive drug trafficking and smuggling activities. Al Qaeda has broadened its associations with criminal organizations in various European countries. Additionally, it has extended its involvement in drug trafficking in regions such as Pakistan and Afghanistan. Studies on the crime-terror nexus have also delved into the evolution and complete convergence of criminal and terrorist groups. The concept of hybrids suggests that the systematic engagement of a terrorist group in criminal activities or an enduring relationship between terrorist and criminal entities could lead to a shift in the terrorists’ ideological agendas towards profit-seeking motivations, and conversely, among organized criminal actors. The crime–terror studies highlight numerous instances of this occurrence. The Abu Sayyaf movement, an extremist separatist Moro Muslim terrorist group in the Philippines that developed connections with Al Qaeda and ISIS, initially participated in kidnapping and drug trafficking as a means of generating revenue. Nevertheless, the group ultimately evolved into a criminal entity, prioritizing profit motivations over its original ideology. Experts have also portrayed the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU) similarly, as it shifted from being a jihadist movement to functioning as a drug trafficking ring. At one point, it briefly gained control of two-thirds of the Central Asian opium routes from Afghanistan. On the “organized crime” aspect of the nexus, it is claimed that common criminals have demonstrated the ability to transform into “criminal soldiers.” Street gangs and drug cartels in Central America and beyond have reportedly engaged in a conflict with the state, characterized as a form of “criminal insurgency.” Acknowledging the increasing complexity of violent actors and the fluidity of their motivations, scholars studying the crime–terror nexus have aimed to create frameworks that capture the transitions of groups between ideological and profit motives, as well as their engagement in various forms of intergroup cooperation. Tamara Tamara Makarenko’s analysis represents a significant endeavor thus far in providing a conceptualization of diverse collaborations between terrorism and organized crime. In Tamara Makarenko’s revised framework, criminal and terrorist actors, along with their intersections, are illustrated on two planes. The first plane involves the adoption of tactics from the “other,” while the second plane accounts for the merging of a criminal and terrorist group. A hybrid entity can simultaneously exhibit both ideological and economic motivations. Scholars, drawing on Tamara Makarenko’s spectrum, clarify the shifts of groups toward tactical and operational changes driven by financial pressures on terrorist groups or political pressures on criminal organizations. The rising occurrence of former criminals within terrorist cells in Europe, often referred to as “gangster jihadists”, has spurred new perspectives on operational connections within the crime-terror nexus. A recent line of research has integrated the recruitment patterns of criminal and terrorist groups into its analyses, emphasizing their recruitment from shared environments or “melting pots.” This research also explores the process of how individuals with a criminal history undergo radicalization. According to this line of thinking, terrorist organizations perceive strategic advantages in recruiting former criminals. Individuals with criminal backgrounds possess qualities deemed valuable by terrorist groups, including experience with violence and clandestine behaviours. Additionally, the connections of offenders to existing criminal networks can be useful for terrorist groups in coordinating, financing, and arming terrorist activities. Despite significant progress in comprehending the diverse intersections of crime and terrorism, numerous questions persist in the existing literature. First and foremost, who are the actors within the crime–terror nexus, and what motivates them? Indeed, this inquiry remains relevant despite the widely accepted consensus that the increasing interconnection of shared tactics and methods among terrorist and criminal groups shall be attributed to four significant developments: globalization, the Internet-driven communication revolution, the conclusion of the Cold War, and the global “war on terror.” The concept of the “crime–terror” nexus and related frameworks frequently blend together terrorist and insurgent groups, often perceiving all activities as transnational, thereby neglecting the links between crime and terrorism and their ties to local dynamics. Even though recent studies have uncovered a complex structure of motives guiding groups’ involvement in crime, encompassing simple financial calculations to ideological and strategic purposes, the adoption of criminal tactics by terrorist groups is frequently presumed to be motivated primarily by revenue-generating considerations. Moreover, the existing crime–terror literature commonly regards the collaboration between terrorist and criminal groups, driven by organizational similarities in methods and tactics, as a prevailing mode of organizational interactions between these two entities. The numerous inhibitors affecting the relationships between terrorist and criminal actors have been overlooked, leading to an inflated assessment of the prevalence of criminal–terrorist partnerships and the ease with which they can be established. Secondly, the foundational conditions for the development of the crime–terror nexus have typically revolved around two prevailing paradigms, emphasizing the facilitating impact of globalization and the permissive influence of “ungoverned” and “poorly governed” territories conducive to the nexus’s emergence. While these studies explored the connections among non-state violent actors, they frequently neglected or obscured the more direct role of the state in the relationship between crime and terrorism. Thirdly, the current explanations for the crime–terror nexus leave a crucial question about the variation in groups’ preferences unanswered. For instance, why do some violent groups choose to engage in certain types of criminal activities but not others, if at all? Finally, the outcomes of the criminal–terrorist convergence arguably represent the least developed area of the scholarship on the crime–terror nexus. The impacts of the crime–terror nexus are often inferred from the observed levels of violence rather than systematically tested. 2 The Nexus between Terrorism and Organized Crime: An Examination from International Relations and International Legal Perspectives The present collection of essays aims to address these and other issues, either directly or indirectly, by exploring the transnational criminal phenomenon referred to as ‘organized criminal terrorism’ from the dual perspective of public international law and international relations. The adoption of this perspective stems from the idea shared by the editors of this edited collection that only such a dual approach, and only an approach that considers all continents, enables an effective addressing of the complex questions and issues posed by this transnational criminal phenomenon, both theoretically and practically. It is essential to note that, while not every paper in the volume embraces this multi-level perspective but only an international legal perspective, the introductory work by Professor Inmaculada Marrero Rocha from the University of Granada (Spain) stands out in doing so. Contrarily, it is noteworthy that a predominant focus within the volume leans towards a purely international legal perspective. This emphasis is discernible as numerous contributions delve into the impact of international legal instruments on counter-terrorism concerning the intricate phenomenon of organised criminal terrorism. A case in point is found in the work of Katerina Akestoridi and Sofia Tzortzi, whose paper meticulously examines the United Nations’ existing legal approach to terrorism, organised crime, and the amalgamation of the two in ‘organised criminal terrorism’. Moreover, Francesco Seatzu directs his efforts towards a thorough examination of the Council of Europe’s counterterrorism approach, thereby contributing to the broader international legal perspective. In delving into the Council of Europe’s strategies for countering terrorism, Seatzu provides insights that resonate with the overarching global legal framework. His examination not only enriches our comprehension of regional responses within Europe but also provides perspectives for shaping a comprehensive and effective international approach to counterterrorism. In this way, Francesco Seatzu’s contribution underscores the interconnected nature of efforts to combat terrorism, emphasizing the importance of a cohesive and coordinated international legal response. The exploration is extended even further through Hitoshi Nasu’s comprehensive examination of the applicability of ASEAN instruments in addressing organized criminal terrorism. Nasu’s contribution significantly enriches the broader discourse on the global legal framework, offering valuable insights into the regional dynamics within the ASEAN context. By scrutinizing the effectiveness and adaptability of ASEAN instruments in the face of organized criminal terrorism, Nasu not only enhances our understanding of regional responses but also contributes essential perspectives to the overarching global discourse. This examination reinforces the importance of fostering cohesion and collaboration across international legal frameworks to effectively counter the intricate challenges posed by organized criminal terrorism on a global scale. Furthermore, Matthew Garrod’s insightful chapter adeptly navigates the intricate landscape of the African Union’s Instruments for Organized Criminal Terrorism. In doing so, it provides valuable insights into the legal mechanisms deployed on the African continent in response to the multifaceted challenge of organized criminal terrorism. By delving into the specific instruments employed by the African Union, Garrod sheds light on the region’s legal strategies, emphasizing the need for a nuanced understanding of the measures adopted to combat this complex phenomenon. In essence, this collective dedication to a primarily international legal viewpoint not only enriches our comprehension of the African response but also underscores the broader imperative to understand and address organized criminal terrorism through the lens of global legal frameworks and instruments. This approach becomes paramount in fostering international collaboration and coherence in tackling the evolving threats posed by transnational criminal networks intertwined with terrorist activities. The rationale behind this specific choice and emphasis becomes readily apparent upon closer examination. The absence of an international legal framework tailored to address the nuances of this criminal phenomenon serves as the driving force. In honing their focus, the authors of the aforementioned chapters and related papers meticulously probe the question of whether international terrorism and organized criminality should be perceived as distinct entities or as intertwined facets of a unified criminal phenomenon – aptly termed organized criminal terrorism. This theoretical exploration prompts a critical inquiry into the necessity of formulating new international legal tools and provisions expressly designed to combat offenses arising from organized criminal terrorism on a global scale. At present, the prospect of such a comprehensive framework remains visible only in specific instances and is contingent on a case-by-case basis. The ongoing theoretical discourse aims to discern not only the nature of the relationship between terrorism and organized crime but also to envisage a potential trajectory for the development of international legal mechanisms tailored to this intricate intersection of threats. In this respect a somewhat variegated picture arises from the volume: on the one hand there are papers that recommend the adoption of new international legal instruments and rules to better cope with this not recent but growing phenomenon of transnational criminality. On the other hand, other papers defend the current approach in international law of regulating international terrorism and international organised crime through different international legal tools and provisions regardless of the existence of a ‘nexus’ between them in practice. The volume, taken as a whole, suggests that there are strong arguments that may be used for supporting both views. The fact of the separate treatment that has been applied so far to organised criminal activities and terrorism in most domestic legislation together with the different character assumed by the phenomenon of ‘organised criminal terrorism’ in various countries across the world suggests that no new and uniform rules should be adopted to regulate the latter phenomenon at global level. However, the common characteristics of terrorist groups and criminal organised groups in several countries, such as countries in Latin America and Western Europe, suggest instead their consideration as mere variations of the same criminal phenomenon. The same consideration is also suggested by the lack of a clear distinction between terrorism and organised criminality in international law as well as from the enduring differences in the nature of these two criminal phenomena. In summary, organized criminal terrorism has taken center stage as a disconcerting phenomenon, drawing heightened concern and attention. The pivotal question revolves around whether and when it should be subjected to a distinct legal treatment within the framework of international law. The present book endeavors to serve as a foundational resource, paving the way for a more informed and nuanced discussion of these pressing issues. By delving into the multifaceted dimensions of organized criminal terrorism from both international law and international relations perspectives, the collection of essays strives to offer valuable insights that contribute to a comprehensive understanding of this complex challenge. It is anticipated that the knowledge disseminated through this book will foster a more informed discourse, facilitating the development of effective legal responses to address the evolving landscape of organized criminal terrorism on the global stage.